Nicely done!!
 

You are an ASSHOLE. Typical leftist pig.
 

Did you join myspace just to insult me? I'm so flattered. See the note below on name-calling and communism.
 

I like your style, David!
 

Ah, so that's why you asked me to look at it and give my opinion; you wanted to see if I would fall for it! Alas, we'll never know; I took a quick look at it after hanging up the phone, quickly got bored and went back to what I was doing, intending to come back later at some point. The link is still in my bookmarks bar, but of course it doesn't lead anywhere any more. To be honest, I probably would have been a little skeptical - surely someone would have picked up on this earlier, considering the hundreds of top scientists worldwide working on the subject? -but I almost certainly would not have guessed it was a hoax. Well done for agreeing to put it up! Is the author going to reveal themselves? Or would that be dangerous?
 

Nature has published an interview with the writer. We're pleased because we tripped up major right wing bastard Rush Limbaugh who has 600 radio stations for his reactionary lies and smears.
 

David,
Actually, I was listening to Rush that day, and it really didn't take long for the hoax to be revealed. Of course, a bit better show prep would have precluded him from going to the air with it at all. Had he gone on for the whole 3 hours about it, perhaps you could claim a bit more of a victory. But really, resulting to name calling only bolsters the claims the right makes about the left. As for Megan calling you a communist, no, I would not agree with her, either. What you and the author of the paper did was not really communistic, but is was rather despicable and speaks volumes about the thin veneer that shrouds your position on global warming. Science, by its very nature, should be a skeptical profession, and is not one based on consensus. It is a process of inquiry, and relies on sound data. Unfortunately, politics has crept in, and now the whole issue has become one that is so emotionally charged I fear that any real discourse on the issue is lost amid the fervor.
 

Yes. Science should be sceptical, and non partisan.

I don't think what we did was despicable. Not compared to the behaviour and attitude of Rush to those who disagree with him. Or compared to the damage resulting from climate change.

Politics has not crept in over here in the UK and that's what I find weird about America. Over here the parties vie with each other to be greener. Today, the Conservatives have floated a 30% cut in CO2 emissions by 2020 - a rise on Labour's 20%. In America, it seems that the neo-cons and Exxon types are the ones who've made it a political issue.

I don't generally like name calling either. I think we should stick to the facts. So thanks for putting me right about how long Rush was fooled for - I could only go on what other bloggers had said.

And there is consensus on global warming. It's just that you choose not to believe it. The IPCC represents the vast majority opinion. It's only a handful of countries and states, particularly in America, that choose to put their heads in the sand. Funny that they are the ones most addicted to oil.
 

I am not a communist - where on earth do you get that from? And - so - you want to censor me? Does this make you a fascist?