http://badastronomy.com/bablog/2007/11/05/science-blog-awards-and-bad-logic

It is hard to take someone with such poor reading comprehension seriously; anyone can accidently post in the wrong section, but you continue to do so even after having the mistake pointed out to you multiple times. Frankly, you give the impression that you are as dumb as a box of hammers.

This leads back to that sticky integrity thingie. In science when a result can’t be reproduced independant of the author what do we call it?

Like when that Korean scientist created room temperature fusion, why aren’t we all running our Hyundai with Mr. Fusion generators?

I am sure it will come to you if you think about it.

Steven Milloy doesn’t deserve that comparison either.
How is it a bizarre thing to question your integrity, when you are here recycling a refutation of Richard Hoagland – as if anybody with one eye and half a brain would believe there are archeological ruins on the moon.
It’s an easy thing to sing in a choir.
Try bucking the system – then tell me about how persuasive you are.

Or better yet, since you disagree with McIntyre, back up Micheal Mann’s hockystick graph, with some real evidence. Or Hansen’s world temperature record for the 1930’s, when Antarctica, Greenland, Africa, and South America had no surface temperature stations.
What did he extrapolate that world graph from?

First, I was comparing Hoagland to Junk Science, not Climate Audit.

Second, I disagree with the bit about self-respect. That’s just a bizarre thing to say.

Third, Mr. McIntyre may indeed think he is fighting for us, but having read many of his articles, I disagree that he is correct.

Fourth, and this one is important– you posted this comment to the wrong blog entry.