on the news reports of global cooling from the 70s and 80s.
i recall the reports reasonably accurately (i believe), and the reports (you know, from "them") clearly stated that we were due for an ice age. ...historically...
according to ice cores, etc, we are due, any century now, for a global cooling.
however, global temperatures are not returning to the cooling that we expect from solar or orbital cycles, instead, the heating is enough to swamp the natural cooling we were expecting.
"and the reports... clearly stated that we were due for an ice age."
Well then the news reports were wrong. Please read "The Myth of the 1970's global cooling scientific consensus" by Peterson et al.., or watch Potholer54's video "Climate Change - Anatomy of a myth".
"according to ice cores, etc, we are due, any century now, for a global cooling."
Please give a source for this (i.e. peer reviewed literature, not a blog).
There is a quick simple solution to global warming and climate change. It is called Muon Catalysed Fusion. As worked on Star Scientific. NO CO2. NO Greenhouse Gases. NO Toxic Waste. The source is dueterium from the World's Oceans - virtually limitless. It is cheap to produce. WE NEED IT NOW. See the website "Star Scientific Limited", Blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath", Youtube video - "In the Footsteps of Fusion"
For every unappreciative moron asserting your hard work is wrong, without any explanation or counter points, there are 361 that really appreciate and enjoy the effort and unpaid time you put in to your videos. I am one of them.
That being said, it's also hugely entertaining when you point out their idiocy and let rip a little bit.
you can fight for someone that says the sky is green(color blind), like (i herd this on the news and its not true) we are the only animal that can drink other animals milk(cats)
This has nothing to do with this video or science in general just a general question to you Potholer54, but are you superstitious to any degree? Thank you.
@mrdaym --This has nothing to do with this video or science in general just a general question to you Potholer54, but are you superstitious to any degree? Thank you. -- it tells you the mistakes he (sometimes) made...
Thanks for your videos, really like to watch them. It's amazing that you can still stand those guys making mindless comment. But for us they are fun to read... (most of the time ;) ).
I especially liked the one who has a professor that studied meterology and now teaches geology...and has an opinion about the temperatures on other planets in the universe...
Wow that's rough you must have to watch a lot of crap, although some of it is generally entertaining. Thanks for the good work keep it up just started watching them but I am hooked. Watched about 3 hours in one night.
This is truly wonderful. I really love Potholer54's clips. You are so keen on representing the peer reviewed studies and what they actually say. It's simply lovely to se...Since there are so much b** shit out there just missrepresenting real science. Plz keep up the incredible work you've done :D
Thank the great flying spaghetti monster that someone with your intellect and superb journalism background is fighting the 'dodo poop' being passed off as fact. I don't know how you have the energy or patience to serve up your dose of reality but it really lifts my spirits. It spurs me on to greater things to hear your rational, fair, but irrepressibly humorous deconstructions of the depressing power hungry ignorance machine that will not fight by the ethics if professes to uphold. Thank you.
Same thing @kinetocore said. Holy shit, dude, this is one he'll of a channel! I also just watch your "who I am" vid. Damn! You even have professional qualifications! No wonder your shit's so good...how can people possibly think they can challenge you on any point, given your professional qualifications?
Presentation is wonderfully warm, well paced, and informative. Arguments (and baseless outrage) are dealt with with admirable tact and patience. I have only just discovered your channel, sir, and I deeply appreciate its existence and the great quantity of work it takes to make it so. Thank you for what you do.
You should open a can of whoop-ass on these naysayers more often, maybe do a video on the psychological process that leads them to make asses of themselves. Who knows, maybe it will shut them up for a while. Whether you do or not, just keep on kickin' ass for science.
Lol, Potholer.. You are awesome... Intelligent? Sure, ok... but your skill at integrating wit, personality, and sarcasm into your shared research is unsurpassed. Love it
Just commenting to say I appreciate the time and effort you put into these videos and it's good to see a real journalist showing every nut with a blog and an opinion to rub together, how it's done. Cheers.
Well, I would like to say that I do thoroughly enjoy your videos Potholer54 (Peter). You are inspirations to those who wish to follow into the world of scientific journalism.
You clearly get some very ‘stupid’ comments but you shouldn’t think that these are a true representative of your viewers; the vast majority of us think you do an excellent work on your channels. Thank You.
I do hope you don't get fed up with the in-exhaustive supply of stupid on the net, and keep making those solid videos, it is very much appreciated, and they do make a difference out there (here)!
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Another A1 piece of damage limitation
By now I have heard every excuse as to how Jones etc, didn't try to destroy scientists careers, remove editors, refuse to allow or pressure individuals from publishing in certain magazines the list is never ending. I won't even qualify the argument that he lost the data or would hide from FOIR
But, the facts remain the same, in the 1970's we were told Iceage by 90's, BBC documentaries true environmentalists careers ruined and still no weather forecasts onT
@deadrebel2 - "the facts remain the same, in the 1970's we were told Iceage by 90's" -- Who told you this in the 1970s? Time magazine? Newsweek? Or did you just read this on the Internet somewhere and you assume it is true? Why? Before you insist that this urban myth is a fact, please check the source of your information, and find out what the scientific literature was saying at the time. You'll be surprised to learn that the vast majority of researchers predicted global warming, not cooling.
No the reason I and millions of others joined Greenpeace actually. What does amaze me though is the fact that non, not one, of the many documentaries from the BBC, Horizon, World in Action et al can be found.
Urban myth, you may say, as with the Medieval warm period temperatures "I'm so unorganised I must have lost them".
Why do you think so many of us left Greenpeace, it was undermined from within and true environmentalists exorcised
@deadrebel2 Perhaps you should actually DO as he asks: RESEARCH.. Use your OWN brain instead of insisting on others thinking for you... Then you won't have someone to blame for your wild flights of fancy---because you will have done the research yourself
Now, like he said, RESEARCH documents about global "cooling" and "warming" in the 70s. You will find that there are 7 reports of predicted cooling and 44 of predicted warming. the MEDIA told you cooling
@deadrebel2 Oh.. why oh why would the media want to manipulate the information!?!?! Because they know the average person is an absolute idiot such as yourself. Because they know they can capture your attention and sell you a story(a FICTIONAL story), and then flipped the coin after a little time, and sell you the OPPOSITE story later. . . It's not "potholer54"s fault that you bought the media garbage.. it's YOUR fault for buying into whatever you're told
@potholer54 "You'll be surprised to learn that the vast majority of researchers predicted global warming, not cooling"
It took just 10 seconds of google time to get that statement verified. Imagine if I did some real leg work, lol...... I too once thought the same thing.....damn Time magazine! ;)
I'll never get tired of thanking you for your videos. Stupidity, ignorance and blind faith are very scary. Reason can shed a light on many problems we're facing.
guffpot; with the greatest respect, I'm going to have to disagree. The "null hypothesis" need only apply if an experiment demands a void answer on inconclusive results; to my knowledge, this isn't a prerequisite of reporting general temperature trends; you're changing the rules retrospectively. At a slightly lower confidence level, measurements show a positive trend. To suggest that we should ignore this on a technicality implies a horrendous bias. The DM knew this.
timaustin - if CO2 calamity theory wants to be scientific, it must adhere to basic scientific principles.
If a key test does not have a null hypothesis, your argument has moved out of the scientific arena.
I know PH54 thinks Jones (uniquely in the human race) may ony be quoted verbatim. But saying "not significant" means "not statistically discernable from zero". We cannot tell the two apart - they're equivalent.
The DM was correct. Jones lacks the evidence to challenge the headline.
I'm with Potholer on the skeptic/denier debate; a scientist who is skeptical on genuine scientific grounds based on sound research and rational thinking is a skeptic. Internet wannabe's who get their information from right wing blows and stick to it in the face of contrary evidence is a denier.
PH - It's a pity you couldn't let the DM point lie.
Good scientific practice is to state the required level of significance for a hypothesis test at the outset (e.g. at the 95% level). If the test fails, we retain the null hypothesis.
What is to be achieved by debating lower probabilities that could have passed the test? There is ALWAYS a lower level we can go to to change the result - the only question is then how low.
We don't do that - it is not acceptable scientific practice.
As the test failed on the data we MUST retain the Null Hypothesis (NH = NO GLOBAL WARMING in the period analysed).
I only point out that the headline is consistent with the scientific method. It is not a question of whether I agree with the DM. The DM's headline is simply MORE CORRECT than your whingeing reply.
Your response to having your scientifically illiterate and foolish argument explained to you is to suggest that I am being childish! Yup - that says it all.
I don't think I've fuly aprechiated how much work you put into theese videoes until now (And I might still be way of the mark). I would like to thank you for taking the time and effort that goes into making theese videoes. I have watched most of them and I find them interesting, informative and very well made.
Keep up the good work! Youtube (and the rest of the world) could really use more people of your skill and integrety!
Given the title (mail bag), I was expecting a hodge podge, but what you've given us is a very cogent essay on intellectual honesty, containing many points that simply needed to be said. Well done. I believe what denialists don't understand is that many of us who accept the science would be overjoyed to know that it's all wrong or a hoax or whatever. Intellectual honesty means accepting things as true, regardless of whether you want them to be true.
Potholer, I have an erratum. In an early video I seem to recall your saying that you preferred the term "skeptic" for those who deny global warming. I believe this occurs in your first GW video early on, but I'll gladly find the time index if you don't know what I'm talking about. Given your experience with (those I choose to call) denialists, I hope you'll correct this error and withdraw the term "skeptic", which is an honorific all but a tiny minority of these people do not deserve.
@fiandrhi It's a conundrum because the scientists themselves are the real skeptics. Its part of their job to be skeptical of their own data, right? Some 'deniers' could be classed as skeptics if they are genuine about getting to the truth. Most of them are deniers in that no matter how much evidence you put before them they refuse to acknowledge or believe it for various reasons. Some of them are dickheads 'cause they are just too thick or bull-headed. Contrarians may be a better generalisation.
@fiandrhi - =In an early video I seem to recall your saying that you preferred the term "skeptic" for those who deny global warming= -- I use the term 'skeptic' to describe climatologists like Lindzen and Svensburg. Climatologists call them 'contrarians' which is a fair description. I'll make a note of that, thanks.
These correction videos are interesting because they show at once the power of the Internet as a collaboration of knowledgeable people disseminating knowledge and correcting other, mistaken views... as well as the sheer lunacy of which it is capable, and which is unfortunately necessary for the former case to be possible.
I'm really glad there are people like you that take the time to research topics and can properly research things and educate people. Please keep up your hard work.
@brandonswan Global lighting? Everybody know that is a myth. Instead, my car mechanic who has a degree in truthology says that it is intelligent lighting from the sun god. Clearly you have done shoddy research, Brandon ^_^
This one is hilarious because deniers DON'T CARE. They already have their dogma. Please don't confuse them with facts.
BTW, "Nighttversionn" is a well known YouTube imposter who masquerades as many others with with a dozen different names, including Nigh'tt'versionn, Nightver'ss'ion, Spifiremacx, Dayversionn, etc.
I carpool with my father and he likes to listen to a particular local radio station because he continues to suffer from the delusion that he'll get local news from them. The "weather man" for this station will read the local weather and, if he thinks that the expected temperatures for the day are cool/cold, will add "so much for global warming".
Please, take as much time as you need to make your videos. Your work here is nothing short of incredible. The underlying message should be taught to children as early as elementary school. It has nothing to do with climate change or evolution, but instead nurturing an inquisitive mind that challenges popular and long-held beliefs, most importantly one's own.
This message is vital in an age when we still falsely believe that the act of publishing an idea somehow makes it credible.
I blame Penn and Teller for shit like this. They did a great job picking apart conspiracy theories and the like, present themselves as skeptics and are a favorite of libertarians but when they did an episode of Bullshit on climate change they could not have dropped the ball any more then if they were a receiver for the Bills in overtime.
you are a very sarcastic bastard and the point of this video is more to take the piss out of those who disagree with you than to point out your own errors. very entertaining, keep up the good work
@GypsyMofakka Actually, it's not that far fetched to have been arguing cooling in the 1970's. There had been a very slight cooling trend since the 1940's. What is more interesting is that there were so many studies at the time that predicted warming when the trend had obviously been cooling. The scientists looked hard at all the underlying mechanisms at work and came the correct conclusion that the climate would more likely start warming and that this could be a problem.
Great video. It's a great pity that religions don't also welcome criticism with a view to finding the truth. Truth to the clergy is like holy water to a vampire.
I can hear the arguments already - - So, you mean - the collapse of the dome in minneapolis doesn't PROVE the new ice age has begun? It sure is cold here in Indianapolis; 20 degrees below the global warming average :-)
Potholer54, your conduct on this matter has been nothing short of criminal. Thankfully Youtubers have blown the whistle on this wicked deceit and your perversely dishonest manipulation. You are a part of the global unelected socialist movement, using your videos as a front. In exposing your lies to those of us who do not have the sharpness of mind to see through your deceit, you have also revealed the folly of the global warming alarmists so called ’science’.
@ConservatoryTV PS. 97.5% of the world’s climate scientists have fabricated results to prove a non existent theory. Governments throughout the world have conspired together to create this scheme and bought the integrity of scientists. I mean, have you seen the big pay packets, big houses, flash cars and trophy wives of these climate scientists? It’s a disgrace.
Also, it’s been snowing in the UK over the last few weeks, so how can there be global warming?
Potholer, i know you get a lot of shit, so let me just say thank you very much, you videos remain very interesting indeed, and i look forwards to further material. Please keep up your very high standards.
Sir.... Mr. Spock would be proud as I am to be a subscriber. Keep up the great work, it's so very needed in this day when every single discussion about EVERYTHING has to be a game to win and not what it should be, which is a desire to find the answer and solutions to the questions we have and the problems we face.
We have a lot of growing up to do as a species and I hope we do it before it's too late for us.
It is obvious for anyone with half a brain that you are one, if not the best reporter of science. You obviously do a lot of hard work for each video, you show your sources and you stick to the point. You do not blabb out opinions as facts.
Keep your head high, the YouTube community can count itself lucky to have people like you actually doing serios videos!
Oooh, good one :) Sadly, i think that most people who post comments like these only watch one particular video and never bother to check the response or even check the channel again. Thank you for all the previous videos, one of rare sources where reason seems to come before emotions. In other words, i always found reasons and data here, no shouts about disaster, global warming disbelievers, etc. etc. Keep up the great work ;)
If I remember correctly, the comment from progressfabbrian is reffering to is a misquote from scientists who state we should be heading to an ice age, but left out the part where it said "thousands/millions of years later" which you pointed out on a previous video. I coud be mistaken on the exact quote though.
I am very interested in science in general but I have no time to do any of my own research. The best I can hope for most of the time is Popular Science and whatever I can find on the net. With all the BS out there I end of skeptical of pretty much everything. I'm grateful to people like you who check this stuff out for us and bring the truth to light. Thanks for creating your videos, I can only imagine how much work is involved. You're doing a great job, please keep it up.
It actually had a 93% significant level. It was a loaded question. Climate scientists usually use a minimum 30 years to find a trend. The fact is that more energy is being trapped in the troposphere.
See Wang & Liang, 2009, "Global atmospheric downward longwave radiation over land surface under all-sky conditions from 1973 to 2008"
and
Griggs, 2007, "Comparison of Spectrally Resolved Outgoing Longwave Radiation over the Tropical Pacific between 1970 and 2003 Using IRIS, IMG, and AIRS"
The sad thing is that the ignorant people who made those accusations will continue to do so regardless of the level of professionalism from people such as yourself or how accurate the data is that you provide, they will continue to deny what is so evidently correct because it doesnt concur with their world view or belief system. Ignorance is thier comfort zone and it's something they will fight to maintain at all costs.
Potholer, it's great to know what careful research goes into your videos. Your channel is an example of excellent scientific reporting and commentary. Would that all our media demonstrated such diligence and attention to accuracy. Thank you for continuing to post excellent content. And thank you for attempting to educate those who do not understand the nature of science, nor show the integrity to back up their claims with facts. Always glad to see a new video from you.
Love it. The world would be a better place if more people were scientifically literate. You argue with research at hand, not opinions. Show someone that their sources are lacking or else walk away.
Great job. I admire your patience. I once made some comment on a video of a stand up comedian making jokes about global warming (suggesting it was just some funny stupidity of some "scientist" wackos), I made some remark, sarcastic or not (I guess I just noted frustrated how baffling it is that people just confidently repeat things without ever bothering to check), and the answer I got asked me whether I ever heard of Lord Monckton. Sigh.
potholer54 is one of those people that actually tries to make the world a better place, to champion evidence and reason, and to shine light on the dimmest of arguments. I, for one, love these videos and really appreciate his taking the time to research and produce them. Carry on Sir.
Isn't the Arctic circle growing though? I've no citation to support this, and I honestly know crap-all about climate change, but I read an article that said the Arctic circle grew in size between 08-09.
@Orthrus - =Isn't the Arctic circle growing though?= Confusion of terms here. The Arctic circle is a geographical line, and is not changing. You may be refering to Antarctic cooling, which is part myth, part misconception. Or you may be refering to Arctic summer ice cover, which has been decreasing for the past 30 years. I will deal with these in future videos.
Thanks mate, I didn't know any of that of course. Now you've jumpstarted the "research stuff" part of my brain.
But a quick question then, what do we call that mass of ice sitting on the North Pole? I mean, if the arctic circle is a geographical area, what is the actual mass called? Is that the summer ice cover you referred to?
@potholer54 From Wikipedia: "The position of the Arctic Circle is not fixed, but directly depends on the Earth's axial tilt, which fluctuates within a margin of 2° over a 40,000 year period,[2] notably due to tidal forces resulting from the orbit of the Moon. The Arctic Circle is currently drifting northwards at a speed of about 15 m (49 ft) per year," Just some nitpicking, but you know these things when you've crossed it numerous times, which I'm going to do again this Christmas.
Do you feel that it is in any way productive or necessary to adress the criticism from people who obviously don't understand your intent with these videos?
@potholer54 Good video... I was wondering if you could perhaps expand on HOW one could go about doing better research of the papers. For instance, you helped me find a rebuttal to "CO2 Falsification", which was enormously helpful. But what sort of key terms, etc. should one enter into the databases to find rebuttals or refutations. That's info I (and others, I assume) could use to do more effective research on our own, without having to harass you. Keep up the great work!
@heckler73 -- =HOW one could go about doing better research of the papers= If a source is given, then it's easy to check the source. If no source is given, the myth has probably been mindlessly copied and pasted. Try googling a conspicuous phrase within the text and you'll find a dozen sites with the same phrasing. One of these usually gives a source, although it might be one of the other dozen sites.
I think the problem is that the consie leaders, being the skilled populist swindlers they are, told their imbecilic flock/sympathizers not merely a bunch of lies (which then populate from consies to other consie-like people, like libertards and lobjectivists and such.) but also skillfully made the very real issue of global warming into a POLITICAL thing.
So the mindless attack drones are doing so out of consie (or libertard/lobjectivist) loyalty, rather then anything else.
I think the key issue is that the fight for science will eventually require both-barrels, no holds barred, but logical and rational attacks on the political right, they're the real problem. Everything from creationism to climate denial comes from the right-wing and their big money masters.
And just like how you can take on creationists not only with science, but also by pointing out the nonsense in their own bible, so the right-wing can be attacked on it's ridiculous base ideas.
I mean when it's pointed out with great clarity just how much the right screws over the non-rich masses, that won't convert any right-wing partizans. But the more fence-sitters who know that, the less support the political right gets. Which is the camp of the anti-science people, and the camp that goes for the votes of the anti-science people.
The pleasure in watching you dismantle errant crap promulgating itself as argument will never diminish. I've never quite recovered from your "But there's no fu**ing carbon in it" comments from your earlier videos and you just keep getting better.
Just wanted to add my appreciation to the thousands of others.
Wow I thought you were admitting you have made mistakes cause now your referring to climate change as the "climate change myth". But as one get to the end of your video your pitch gets higher. People will often comment before watching the whole video if they have already seen the same information already. They also comment and thumbs down if your apply to be scaremongering like most of the truther channels. It's easier to control people with uncertainty then the truth
Just wanted to take a moment to say 'thanks'. Having just made a point of how much time and effort you put into these it seemed like the least I could do, considering I watch every one of them.
Also, please ignore people like naz2999. Sarcasm is to me like the ambrosia of ancient myth.
Nice work... You are quite gentlemanly to a bunch of fucknuckle "professors of the university of you tube" who trawl these precincts. Keep it up potholer... You are a beacon of light
Perhaps you could go back to school and study climate science and join the ranks on the front lines against the possible hardships that face our species? I'm not sure how many people actively accept the scientific consensus after watching videos like yours, packed full of information and supported by overwhelming evidence though they may be. The kind of person that rejects GW is someone who doesn't have much knowledge and has no interest in gaining any.
on the news reports of global cooling from the 70s and 80s.
i recall the reports reasonably accurately (i believe), and the reports (you know, from "them") clearly stated that we were due for an ice age. ...historically...
according to ice cores, etc, we are due, any century now, for a global cooling.
however, global temperatures are not returning to the cooling that we expect from solar or orbital cycles, instead, the heating is enough to swamp the natural cooling we were expecting.
loqkLoqkson 2 months ago
@loqkLoqkson
"and the reports... clearly stated that we were due for an ice age."
Well then the news reports were wrong. Please read "The Myth of the 1970's global cooling scientific consensus" by Peterson et al.., or watch Potholer54's video "Climate Change - Anatomy of a myth".
"according to ice cores, etc, we are due, any century now, for a global cooling."
Please give a source for this (i.e. peer reviewed literature, not a blog).
ZShogan 1 month ago
Thank you for making these videos, you have educated me on a lot of things, not to mention changed my views on several issues. Keep up the good work!
mirex951 4 months ago 2
"Balls, intelligence,integrity, maturity" - I think you're setting the bar much to high for practically all the YouTube deniers.
bannor99 4 months ago in playlist More videos from potholer54 2
@8:44 You mean my house won't be beach front property by 2030? :(
mjh012363 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is a quick simple solution to global warming and climate change. It is called Muon Catalysed Fusion. As worked on Star Scientific. NO CO2. NO Greenhouse Gases. NO Toxic Waste. The source is dueterium from the World's Oceans - virtually limitless. It is cheap to produce. WE NEED IT NOW. See the website "Star Scientific Limited", Blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath", Youtube video - "In the Footsteps of Fusion"
2110kop 7 months ago
For every unappreciative moron asserting your hard work is wrong, without any explanation or counter points, there are 361 that really appreciate and enjoy the effort and unpaid time you put in to your videos. I am one of them.
That being said, it's also hugely entertaining when you point out their idiocy and let rip a little bit.
JeefCakes 7 months ago 10
you can fight for someone that says the sky is green(color blind), like (i herd this on the news and its not true) we are the only animal that can drink other animals milk(cats)
nicholishere 7 months ago
This has nothing to do with this video or science in general just a general question to you Potholer54, but are you superstitious to any degree? Thank you.
mrdaym 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrdaym --This has nothing to do with this video or science in general just a general question to you Potholer54, but are you superstitious to any degree? Thank you. -- it tells you the mistakes he (sometimes) made...
nicholishere 7 months ago
Thanks for your videos, really like to watch them. It's amazing that you can still stand those guys making mindless comment. But for us they are fun to read... (most of the time ;) ).
I especially liked the one who has a professor that studied meterology and now teaches geology...and has an opinion about the temperatures on other planets in the universe...
thargor2k 8 months ago
Wow that's rough you must have to watch a lot of crap, although some of it is generally entertaining. Thanks for the good work keep it up just started watching them but I am hooked. Watched about 3 hours in one night.
gorczyca86 8 months ago
God I love your channel
w13d3rgEb0r3n 8 months ago
This is truly wonderful. I really love Potholer54's clips. You are so keen on representing the peer reviewed studies and what they actually say. It's simply lovely to se...Since there are so much b** shit out there just missrepresenting real science. Plz keep up the incredible work you've done :D
maax82 8 months ago
Thank the great flying spaghetti monster that someone with your intellect and superb journalism background is fighting the 'dodo poop' being passed off as fact. I don't know how you have the energy or patience to serve up your dose of reality but it really lifts my spirits. It spurs me on to greater things to hear your rational, fair, but irrepressibly humorous deconstructions of the depressing power hungry ignorance machine that will not fight by the ethics if professes to uphold. Thank you.
Neutronstar2171 9 months ago
Same thing @kinetocore said. Holy shit, dude, this is one he'll of a channel! I also just watch your "who I am" vid. Damn! You even have professional qualifications! No wonder your shit's so good...how can people possibly think they can challenge you on any point, given your professional qualifications?
macgeek2004 9 months ago
Well done and keep making these wonderful videos.
77Totems 9 months ago
Presentation is wonderfully warm, well paced, and informative. Arguments (and baseless outrage) are dealt with with admirable tact and patience. I have only just discovered your channel, sir, and I deeply appreciate its existence and the great quantity of work it takes to make it so. Thank you for what you do.
kinetocore 10 months ago
Your videos are absolutely amazing and the skill you deal with uninformed morons is astounding.
beepmeepbeep 10 months ago
You should open a can of whoop-ass on these naysayers more often, maybe do a video on the psychological process that leads them to make asses of themselves. Who knows, maybe it will shut them up for a while. Whether you do or not, just keep on kickin' ass for science.
doublescotchonice 10 months ago
Thankyou a million times over!
AxisMundiOnline 1 year ago
Thank you for your hard work.
rykoodasr 1 year ago
Lol, Potholer.. You are awesome... Intelligent? Sure, ok... but your skill at integrating wit, personality, and sarcasm into your shared research is unsurpassed. Love it
xESOTERlC 1 year ago
Can you please do an episode (issue? installment? errr...) on the claims that "all measured surface warming is due to urban heat island effects"?
um1imo 1 year ago
These videos are a great document of fact and fiction in the climate debate, which is possible for ordinary people to understand. Thank you.
JackyVSO 1 year ago
Just commenting to say I appreciate the time and effort you put into these videos and it's good to see a real journalist showing every nut with a blog and an opinion to rub together, how it's done. Cheers.
etnlIcarus 1 year ago
Keep up the great work P54! All of your subs love you. (in a proper manly way)
Nakedhominid 1 year ago
Well, I would like to say that I do thoroughly enjoy your videos Potholer54 (Peter). You are inspirations to those who wish to follow into the world of scientific journalism.
You clearly get some very ‘stupid’ comments but you shouldn’t think that these are a true representative of your viewers; the vast majority of us think you do an excellent work on your channels. Thank You.
TheFireHorseUK 1 year ago
I do hope you don't get fed up with the in-exhaustive supply of stupid on the net, and keep making those solid videos, it is very much appreciated, and they do make a difference out there (here)!
vman1981 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Another A1 piece of damage limitation
By now I have heard every excuse as to how Jones etc, didn't try to destroy scientists careers, remove editors, refuse to allow or pressure individuals from publishing in certain magazines the list is never ending. I won't even qualify the argument that he lost the data or would hide from FOIR
But, the facts remain the same, in the 1970's we were told Iceage by 90's, BBC documentaries true environmentalists careers ruined and still no weather forecasts onT
deadrebel2 1 year ago
@deadrebel2 - "the facts remain the same, in the 1970's we were told Iceage by 90's" -- Who told you this in the 1970s? Time magazine? Newsweek? Or did you just read this on the Internet somewhere and you assume it is true? Why? Before you insist that this urban myth is a fact, please check the source of your information, and find out what the scientific literature was saying at the time. You'll be surprised to learn that the vast majority of researchers predicted global warming, not cooling.
potholer54 1 year ago 36
@potholer54
No the reason I and millions of others joined Greenpeace actually. What does amaze me though is the fact that non, not one, of the many documentaries from the BBC, Horizon, World in Action et al can be found.
Urban myth, you may say, as with the Medieval warm period temperatures "I'm so unorganised I must have lost them".
Why do you think so many of us left Greenpeace, it was undermined from within and true environmentalists exorcised
Scientists predicted cooling in the 70's
deadrebel2 1 year ago
@deadrebel2 Perhaps you should actually DO as he asks: RESEARCH.. Use your OWN brain instead of insisting on others thinking for you... Then you won't have someone to blame for your wild flights of fancy---because you will have done the research yourself
Now, like he said, RESEARCH documents about global "cooling" and "warming" in the 70s. You will find that there are 7 reports of predicted cooling and 44 of predicted warming. the MEDIA told you cooling
xESOTERlC 1 year ago
@deadrebel2 Oh.. why oh why would the media want to manipulate the information!?!?! Because they know the average person is an absolute idiot such as yourself. Because they know they can capture your attention and sell you a story(a FICTIONAL story), and then flipped the coin after a little time, and sell you the OPPOSITE story later. . . It's not "potholer54"s fault that you bought the media garbage.. it's YOUR fault for buying into whatever you're told
xESOTERlC 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@potholer54 "You'll be surprised to learn that the vast majority of researchers predicted global warming, not cooling"
It took just 10 seconds of google time to get that statement verified. Imagine if I did some real leg work, lol...... I too once thought the same thing.....damn Time magazine! ;)
LordSauceness 1 year ago
@deadrebel2 A+ for applied ignorance.
xESOTERlC 1 year ago
i heart potholer
WhrsTheMoneyLabowski 1 year ago
I'll never get tired of thanking you for your videos. Stupidity, ignorance and blind faith are very scary. Reason can shed a light on many problems we're facing.
Sebastian198004 1 year ago
guffpot; with the greatest respect, I'm going to have to disagree. The "null hypothesis" need only apply if an experiment demands a void answer on inconclusive results; to my knowledge, this isn't a prerequisite of reporting general temperature trends; you're changing the rules retrospectively. At a slightly lower confidence level, measurements show a positive trend. To suggest that we should ignore this on a technicality implies a horrendous bias. The DM knew this.
timaustin2000 1 year ago
timaustin - if CO2 calamity theory wants to be scientific, it must adhere to basic scientific principles.
If a key test does not have a null hypothesis, your argument has moved out of the scientific arena.
I know PH54 thinks Jones (uniquely in the human race) may ony be quoted verbatim. But saying "not significant" means "not statistically discernable from zero". We cannot tell the two apart - they're equivalent.
The DM was correct. Jones lacks the evidence to challenge the headline.
gufpott 1 year ago
Comment removed
timaustin2000 1 year ago
I'm with Potholer on the skeptic/denier debate; a scientist who is skeptical on genuine scientific grounds based on sound research and rational thinking is a skeptic. Internet wannabe's who get their information from right wing blows and stick to it in the face of contrary evidence is a denier.
timaustin2000 1 year ago
PH - It's a pity you couldn't let the DM point lie.
Good scientific practice is to state the required level of significance for a hypothesis test at the outset (e.g. at the 95% level). If the test fails, we retain the null hypothesis.
What is to be achieved by debating lower probabilities that could have passed the test? There is ALWAYS a lower level we can go to to change the result - the only question is then how low.
We don't do that - it is not acceptable scientific practice.
gufpott 1 year ago
Further-
As the test failed on the data we MUST retain the Null Hypothesis (NH = NO GLOBAL WARMING in the period analysed).
I only point out that the headline is consistent with the scientific method. It is not a question of whether I agree with the DM. The DM's headline is simply MORE CORRECT than your whingeing reply.
Your response to having your scientifically illiterate and foolish argument explained to you is to suggest that I am being childish! Yup - that says it all.
gufpott 1 year ago
I don't think I've fuly aprechiated how much work you put into theese videoes until now (And I might still be way of the mark). I would like to thank you for taking the time and effort that goes into making theese videoes. I have watched most of them and I find them interesting, informative and very well made.
Keep up the good work! Youtube (and the rest of the world) could really use more people of your skill and integrety!
Kennethah81 1 year ago 3
Given the title (mail bag), I was expecting a hodge podge, but what you've given us is a very cogent essay on intellectual honesty, containing many points that simply needed to be said. Well done. I believe what denialists don't understand is that many of us who accept the science would be overjoyed to know that it's all wrong or a hoax or whatever. Intellectual honesty means accepting things as true, regardless of whether you want them to be true.
fiandrhi 1 year ago 2
Potholer, I have an erratum. In an early video I seem to recall your saying that you preferred the term "skeptic" for those who deny global warming. I believe this occurs in your first GW video early on, but I'll gladly find the time index if you don't know what I'm talking about. Given your experience with (those I choose to call) denialists, I hope you'll correct this error and withdraw the term "skeptic", which is an honorific all but a tiny minority of these people do not deserve.
fiandrhi 1 year ago
@fiandrhi It's a conundrum because the scientists themselves are the real skeptics. Its part of their job to be skeptical of their own data, right? Some 'deniers' could be classed as skeptics if they are genuine about getting to the truth. Most of them are deniers in that no matter how much evidence you put before them they refuse to acknowledge or believe it for various reasons. Some of them are dickheads 'cause they are just too thick or bull-headed. Contrarians may be a better generalisation.
68spaceman 1 year ago
@fiandrhi - =In an early video I seem to recall your saying that you preferred the term "skeptic" for those who deny global warming= -- I use the term 'skeptic' to describe climatologists like Lindzen and Svensburg. Climatologists call them 'contrarians' which is a fair description. I'll make a note of that, thanks.
potholer54 1 year ago 4
Thanks again. Keep up the good work mate!
limeshakes 1 year ago
Why do I never meet interesting and intelligent people like you in the UK? I feel so lonely ;-)
DogOfTheSpag 1 year ago
Thanks for another great video. Rare (in the extreme) to find someone on youtube who corrects their own mistakes. Look forward to your future work.
gilga00 1 year ago
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
No matter how hard you try there will always be people who put science down to nothing more than a conspiracy.
OfOneAudience 1 year ago
"Super-looking wall!"
WeThoughtWrong 1 year ago
These correction videos are interesting because they show at once the power of the Internet as a collaboration of knowledgeable people disseminating knowledge and correcting other, mistaken views... as well as the sheer lunacy of which it is capable, and which is unfortunately necessary for the former case to be possible.
paulbottomley42 1 year ago 2
I like you Mr. Holer.
amberience 1 year ago 2
Always enjoy your videos. kudos.
fusedchromosome 1 year ago
I'm really glad there are people like you that take the time to research topics and can properly research things and educate people. Please keep up your hard work.
xXcoolcubeXx 1 year ago 87
It is presently warmer than normal out. GLOBAL WARMING!
It is presently light out. GLOBAL LIGHTING!
brandonswan 1 year ago
@brandonswan Global lighting? Everybody know that is a myth. Instead, my car mechanic who has a degree in truthology says that it is intelligent lighting from the sun god. Clearly you have done shoddy research, Brandon ^_^
Smokatronic 1 year ago
Potholer, I love your videos. They're terrific.
This one is hilarious because deniers DON'T CARE. They already have their dogma. Please don't confuse them with facts.
BTW, "Nighttversionn" is a well known YouTube imposter who masquerades as many others with with a dozen different names, including Nigh'tt'versionn, Nightver'ss'ion, Spifiremacx, Dayversionn, etc.
So much for scientific integrity.
goog2k 1 year ago
its' SO fucking annoying that people think we get our sources from IPCC, and they only get their info from Fox News, AEI, CEI, GCMI, OISM, SPPI,
spiritualbully 1 year ago
I for one love your vids. Very entertaining and insightful. May I suggest you debunk the vaccine autism causation myth.
melowar78 1 year ago
I carpool with my father and he likes to listen to a particular local radio station because he continues to suffer from the delusion that he'll get local news from them. The "weather man" for this station will read the local weather and, if he thinks that the expected temperatures for the day are cool/cold, will add "so much for global warming".
fedos 1 year ago
Hey potholer, it is now colder than it was a couple of hours ago. Global warming disproved! Scientists are lying to me!
Just kidding guys. I'm no denialist dipshit.
CodaCola 1 year ago
Having an open mind that is resistant to bullshit might be the greatest thing anyone can accomplish.
charlieapeshit 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Potholer, your are a lying barstard.
klesks8686 1 year ago
@klesks8686 You wrote just 6 words. And STILL managed a full 3 spelling/grammatical mistakes.
What an accomplishment.
TheNeognostic 1 year ago 6
@TheNeognostic
go to 10:25
klesks8686 1 year ago
@klesks8686
Care to cite how, or are you just making baseless accusations? Cite where he lies, come on, don't just say he lies, elaborate.
Killua2001 1 year ago
@klesks8686 sad
cruciphile 8 months ago
Please, take as much time as you need to make your videos. Your work here is nothing short of incredible. The underlying message should be taught to children as early as elementary school. It has nothing to do with climate change or evolution, but instead nurturing an inquisitive mind that challenges popular and long-held beliefs, most importantly one's own.
This message is vital in an age when we still falsely believe that the act of publishing an idea somehow makes it credible.
Bowser1111 1 year ago
Never trust anybody who can't explain to you the circumstances under which they'd change their mind.
cluebcke 1 year ago
I blame Penn and Teller for shit like this. They did a great job picking apart conspiracy theories and the like, present themselves as skeptics and are a favorite of libertarians but when they did an episode of Bullshit on climate change they could not have dropped the ball any more then if they were a receiver for the Bills in overtime.
cugamer 1 year ago
you are a very sarcastic bastard and the point of this video is more to take the piss out of those who disagree with you than to point out your own errors. very entertaining, keep up the good work
yngvaibucketrucci 1 year ago
@yngvaibucketrucci I think he was doing both.
TheNeognostic 1 year ago
@yngvaibucketrucci care to explain or point out his errors, ...... thought so!
jossman25 1 year ago
@jossman25 care to read my whole post before you reply, ...... thought so!
and even if I was serious it would still be true, I never said anything about him making errors
yngvaibucketrucci 1 year ago
"Al Gore letting off some steam." Hah!
Why would one argue that scientists predicted a "mini-ice age" in the '70s when the average global temperature has in fact risen?
GypsyMofakka 1 year ago
@GypsyMofakka Actually, it's not that far fetched to have been arguing cooling in the 1970's. There had been a very slight cooling trend since the 1940's. What is more interesting is that there were so many studies at the time that predicted warming when the trend had obviously been cooling. The scientists looked hard at all the underlying mechanisms at work and came the correct conclusion that the climate would more likely start warming and that this could be a problem.
robhoneycutt 1 year ago
Great video. It's a great pity that religions don't also welcome criticism with a view to finding the truth. Truth to the clergy is like holy water to a vampire.
warren52nz 1 year ago
AWESOME!!
robopanther 1 year ago
I can hear the arguments already - - So, you mean - the collapse of the dome in minneapolis doesn't PROVE the new ice age has begun? It sure is cold here in Indianapolis; 20 degrees below the global warming average :-)
financialcounselor 1 year ago
@financialcounselor The argument I generally use for those sorts of situations is "the plural of anectdote is not data"
camydoger 1 year ago
Potholer54, your conduct on this matter has been nothing short of criminal. Thankfully Youtubers have blown the whistle on this wicked deceit and your perversely dishonest manipulation. You are a part of the global unelected socialist movement, using your videos as a front. In exposing your lies to those of us who do not have the sharpness of mind to see through your deceit, you have also revealed the folly of the global warming alarmists so called ’science’.
ConservatoryTV 1 year ago
@ConservatoryTV PS. 97.5% of the world’s climate scientists have fabricated results to prove a non existent theory. Governments throughout the world have conspired together to create this scheme and bought the integrity of scientists. I mean, have you seen the big pay packets, big houses, flash cars and trophy wives of these climate scientists? It’s a disgrace.
Also, it’s been snowing in the UK over the last few weeks, so how can there be global warming?
ConservatoryTV 1 year ago
@ConservatoryTV Actually, I've no 'evidence' to support my assertions but I've been reading WUWT so it must be true.
ConservatoryTV 1 year ago
@ConservatoryTV Nice trolling. You really did have me going there, I was halfway through writing a counter-attack.
Good show.
camydoger 1 year ago
Good work, as per usual! Loved the headline analogies!
ohwotagiveaway 1 year ago
Lies! Just kidding in this refreshing oasis of cool, calm and rational thinking.
ThorGoLucky 1 year ago
Keep up the great work, potholer54!
Any guess as to how many of the YouTube commenters who deny AGW
are really the same individual? (say, based on their writing style?)
deskset24 1 year ago
Potholer, i know you get a lot of shit, so let me just say thank you very much, you videos remain very interesting indeed, and i look forwards to further material. Please keep up your very high standards.
sleepymagpie 1 year ago 98
You are doing great work.
Vortex42 1 year ago
The thumbs up score is very encouraging.
CanterburyCat 1 year ago
Sir.... Mr. Spock would be proud as I am to be a subscriber. Keep up the great work, it's so very needed in this day when every single discussion about EVERYTHING has to be a game to win and not what it should be, which is a desire to find the answer and solutions to the questions we have and the problems we face.
We have a lot of growing up to do as a species and I hope we do it before it's too late for us.
MoJoSB 1 year ago
It is obvious for anyone with half a brain that you are one, if not the best reporter of science. You obviously do a lot of hard work for each video, you show your sources and you stick to the point. You do not blabb out opinions as facts.
Keep your head high, the YouTube community can count itself lucky to have people like you actually doing serios videos!
PaxOfMind 1 year ago 3
You are far to Logical, creationists will never understand. LOL
gregrutz 1 year ago
Right now there's 13,337 views.
leeet.
technicallyabsurd 1 year ago
@technicallyabsurd
Indeed!
EikC 1 year ago
Oooh, good one :) Sadly, i think that most people who post comments like these only watch one particular video and never bother to check the response or even check the channel again. Thank you for all the previous videos, one of rare sources where reason seems to come before emotions. In other words, i always found reasons and data here, no shouts about disaster, global warming disbelievers, etc. etc. Keep up the great work ;)
Kropikovo 1 year ago
If I remember correctly, the comment from progressfabbrian is reffering to is a misquote from scientists who state we should be heading to an ice age, but left out the part where it said "thousands/millions of years later" which you pointed out on a previous video. I coud be mistaken on the exact quote though.
88Keyz101 1 year ago
I am very interested in science in general but I have no time to do any of my own research. The best I can hope for most of the time is Popular Science and whatever I can find on the net. With all the BS out there I end of skeptical of pretty much everything. I'm grateful to people like you who check this stuff out for us and bring the truth to light. Thanks for creating your videos, I can only imagine how much work is involved. You're doing a great job, please keep it up.
playadominical 1 year ago 3
It actually had a 93% significant level. It was a loaded question. Climate scientists usually use a minimum 30 years to find a trend. The fact is that more energy is being trapped in the troposphere.
See Wang & Liang, 2009, "Global atmospheric downward longwave radiation over land surface under all-sky conditions from 1973 to 2008"
and
Griggs, 2007, "Comparison of Spectrally Resolved Outgoing Longwave Radiation over the Tropical Pacific between 1970 and 2003 Using IRIS, IMG, and AIRS"
WaxItYourself 1 year ago
Thank you very much for all your hard work and commitment to intellectual integrity, potholer. The world could use a few more like you.
Samsaptaka 1 year ago
I love your videos =)
plllll0 1 year ago
The sad thing is that the ignorant people who made those accusations will continue to do so regardless of the level of professionalism from people such as yourself or how accurate the data is that you provide, they will continue to deny what is so evidently correct because it doesnt concur with their world view or belief system. Ignorance is thier comfort zone and it's something they will fight to maintain at all costs.
Good vid :)
AussieNaturalist 1 year ago 2
"a piss-poor job" :D Fuckin' awesome.
dildace 1 year ago
You, sir, are doing a great public service. I have spread the word about your work far and wide. Regrettably, some people just refuse to listen.
SpekkioMofW 1 year ago
Your videos are awesome, i appreciate the work you put into them.
luker4459 1 year ago
Thanks for all your work on these videos!
triftenC 1 year ago
Potholer, it's great to know what careful research goes into your videos. Your channel is an example of excellent scientific reporting and commentary. Would that all our media demonstrated such diligence and attention to accuracy. Thank you for continuing to post excellent content. And thank you for attempting to educate those who do not understand the nature of science, nor show the integrity to back up their claims with facts. Always glad to see a new video from you.
laraesque 1 year ago 2
great work, keep it up. wonderfully objective. maybe you should work in science...
aardjazz 1 year ago
This is a good filler video for between the science and debunk videos, I think its a decent way to keep your fans happy.
supafly345 1 year ago
Stimulating work as always.
solarsnowfall 1 year ago
Daily Mail 1969: 'Armstrong Lands on Moon; says its no big deal'
ProcInc 1 year ago
Your stuff is brilliant...
I still dont get why so many haters!?
EFRENURENAG 1 year ago 2
I'm too lazy to lift a finger to check the facts but I'm on team Potholer. =S
Atkj 1 year ago
Much love to you potholer.
And I definitely come here for well sourced, well documented, and well thought videos.
borrofburi 1 year ago 2
Love it. The world would be a better place if more people were scientifically literate. You argue with research at hand, not opinions. Show someone that their sources are lacking or else walk away.
Dark1777 1 year ago
Great job. I admire your patience. I once made some comment on a video of a stand up comedian making jokes about global warming (suggesting it was just some funny stupidity of some "scientist" wackos), I made some remark, sarcastic or not (I guess I just noted frustrated how baffling it is that people just confidently repeat things without ever bothering to check), and the answer I got asked me whether I ever heard of Lord Monckton. Sigh.
soaresdanniel 1 year ago
"...You're an advocate of science, u should be ashamed of yourself"
O.o wow.
jbz3 1 year ago
That was awesome. Science, bitches!
AleximusMaximus 1 year ago 2
I love people like this on youtube!
ajcestrada 1 year ago 2
abso-freakin-lutely.
Paxmax 1 year ago
That shut them up
hayshed 1 year ago
potholer54 is one of those people that actually tries to make the world a better place, to champion evidence and reason, and to shine light on the dimmest of arguments. I, for one, love these videos and really appreciate his taking the time to research and produce them. Carry on Sir.
HydrogenAlpha 1 year ago 10
Isn't the Arctic circle growing though? I've no citation to support this, and I honestly know crap-all about climate change, but I read an article that said the Arctic circle grew in size between 08-09.
Did that really happen?
Orthrus 1 year ago
@Orthrus - =Isn't the Arctic circle growing though?= Confusion of terms here. The Arctic circle is a geographical line, and is not changing. You may be refering to Antarctic cooling, which is part myth, part misconception. Or you may be refering to Arctic summer ice cover, which has been decreasing for the past 30 years. I will deal with these in future videos.
potholer54 1 year ago 2
@potholer54
Thanks mate, I didn't know any of that of course. Now you've jumpstarted the "research stuff" part of my brain.
But a quick question then, what do we call that mass of ice sitting on the North Pole? I mean, if the arctic circle is a geographical area, what is the actual mass called? Is that the summer ice cover you referred to?
Thanks again, I'll get down to more googling.
Orthrus 1 year ago
@potholer54 From Wikipedia: "The position of the Arctic Circle is not fixed, but directly depends on the Earth's axial tilt, which fluctuates within a margin of 2° over a 40,000 year period,[2] notably due to tidal forces resulting from the orbit of the Moon. The Arctic Circle is currently drifting northwards at a speed of about 15 m (49 ft) per year," Just some nitpicking, but you know these things when you've crossed it numerous times, which I'm going to do again this Christmas.
pickerman776 1 year ago
@Orthrus No, the Arctic isn't growing. That is a Lord Monckton myth. Latest satellite data shows it's shrinking at an ever increasing rate.
meercatdotcom 1 year ago
oh, so there is a form you can fill out in the event you are full of it?
wow...your integrity really never ceases to amaze me..
(no, I'm not being sarcastic-that was win.)
Albukhshi 1 year ago
OK, that was a rethorical question by the way. :) But WHY???!!!11!one
saxojon 1 year ago
Do you feel that it is in any way productive or necessary to adress the criticism from people who obviously don't understand your intent with these videos?
saxojon 1 year ago
@potholer54 Good video... I was wondering if you could perhaps expand on HOW one could go about doing better research of the papers. For instance, you helped me find a rebuttal to "CO2 Falsification", which was enormously helpful. But what sort of key terms, etc. should one enter into the databases to find rebuttals or refutations. That's info I (and others, I assume) could use to do more effective research on our own, without having to harass you. Keep up the great work!
heckler73 1 year ago
@heckler73 -- =HOW one could go about doing better research of the papers= If a source is given, then it's easy to check the source. If no source is given, the myth has probably been mindlessly copied and pasted. Try googling a conspicuous phrase within the text and you'll find a dozen sites with the same phrasing. One of these usually gives a source, although it might be one of the other dozen sites.
potholer54 1 year ago
@heckler73 Your friendly neighborhood public librarian can help you with databases. Make use of them!
SpekkioMofW 1 year ago
I think the problem is that the consie leaders, being the skilled populist swindlers they are, told their imbecilic flock/sympathizers not merely a bunch of lies (which then populate from consies to other consie-like people, like libertards and lobjectivists and such.) but also skillfully made the very real issue of global warming into a POLITICAL thing.
So the mindless attack drones are doing so out of consie (or libertard/lobjectivist) loyalty, rather then anything else.
Shavarnarak 1 year ago
@Shavarnarak
I think the key issue is that the fight for science will eventually require both-barrels, no holds barred, but logical and rational attacks on the political right, they're the real problem. Everything from creationism to climate denial comes from the right-wing and their big money masters.
And just like how you can take on creationists not only with science, but also by pointing out the nonsense in their own bible, so the right-wing can be attacked on it's ridiculous base ideas.
Shavarnarak 1 year ago
@Shavarnarak
I mean when it's pointed out with great clarity just how much the right screws over the non-rich masses, that won't convert any right-wing partizans. But the more fence-sitters who know that, the less support the political right gets. Which is the camp of the anti-science people, and the camp that goes for the votes of the anti-science people.
Shavarnarak 1 year ago
Some people have problems with potholer because he looks at all sides of an issue...and sometimes their side is just wrong.
VesusSheist 1 year ago
The pleasure in watching you dismantle errant crap promulgating itself as argument will never diminish. I've never quite recovered from your "But there's no fu**ing carbon in it" comments from your earlier videos and you just keep getting better.
Just wanted to add my appreciation to the thousands of others.
Yakslipper 1 year ago 50
what program(s) do you use to create your videos?
mrhnm 1 year ago
@mrhnm -- =what program(s) do you use to create your videos? =
Corel video studio and Showbiz 2.
potholer54 1 year ago
@potholer54 Thank you very much kind sir.
mrhnm 1 year ago
Well done, mate!
signingupisretarded 1 year ago
Wow I thought you were admitting you have made mistakes cause now your referring to climate change as the "climate change myth". But as one get to the end of your video your pitch gets higher. People will often comment before watching the whole video if they have already seen the same information already. They also comment and thumbs down if your apply to be scaremongering like most of the truther channels. It's easier to control people with uncertainty then the truth
MicrosoftsourceCode 1 year ago
I'm not infantile...you are so there.
garytheagnostic 1 year ago
Trojan like work Potholer! Very much appreciated.
dancedissadent2 1 year ago
I wish you would stop confusing me with facts, my mind's made up. LOL It is like the GOP; they love truth but hate facts.
rollsthepaul 1 year ago
Potholer54, you are guilty!
...of being truthful and insanely interesting in your videos
kirkey99 1 year ago
is just me or does he sound like Bear Grills
syberblade50 1 year ago
Brilliant, as usual. Thanks for all your research and reporting.
sanphaka04 1 year ago
A very diplomatic & polite 'fuck you' there ;)
Thanks for all the hardwork - i'm quite sure it is appreciated by 99% of us.
xtro1969 1 year ago 2
Thank,s from Sweden!
tomaselvis 1 year ago
Thanks for all your hard work, its great stuff. And keep up the sarcasm, its funny :P
Kimmyloca0 1 year ago
Just wanted to take a moment to say 'thanks'. Having just made a point of how much time and effort you put into these it seemed like the least I could do, considering I watch every one of them.
Also, please ignore people like naz2999. Sarcasm is to me like the ambrosia of ancient myth.
TheFodderBoy 1 year ago
"...not sceptical, but INFANTILE." That's a good 'un. I've made a note of that. Thanks!
effyleven 1 year ago
sanity and evidence will conquer all
03jkeeley 1 year ago
Excellent video!
blabby102 1 year ago
I like your discussions but please can you tone down on the sarcasm and be more professional as sarcasm is annoying to me.
naz2999 1 year ago
Nice work... You are quite gentlemanly to a bunch of fucknuckle "professors of the university of you tube" who trawl these precincts. Keep it up potholer... You are a beacon of light
bernzeppi 1 year ago
What a great video! I don't think there is a better way to answer the comments you get.
Lingula77 1 year ago
great
KilluaXIII 1 year ago
I appreciate what you do.
Perhaps you could go back to school and study climate science and join the ranks on the front lines against the possible hardships that face our species? I'm not sure how many people actively accept the scientific consensus after watching videos like yours, packed full of information and supported by overwhelming evidence though they may be. The kind of person that rejects GW is someone who doesn't have much knowledge and has no interest in gaining any.
zapo147 1 year ago 2
True journalist integrity is hard to find these days. This is pure gold, thank you!
turcca 1 year ago
smackdown!
mocrg 1 year ago