Mock Swedish? This is an outrage!

Don't forget to turn on the subtitles for the last one.

And you are not supposed to throw things.

George Orwell on the promiscuous use of the word 'Fascism'

It would seem that, as used, the word 'Fascism' is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, youth hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I don't know what else.
Eric Arthur Blair (George Orwell)

How to make the text in Blogspot postings "Justified" by default

Please verify that you know what you are doing. If you break something on your blog, it is not my fault – but if it works, I will take all credit for it! :-)

To make all the text in all posting on Blogger "Justified" by default (to make text flush on left and right, and get rid of the ragged right edge), you can try the following:

1. Select Design from your Blogger Dashboard
2. Then select Template Designer 
3. Then select Advanced 
4.  Scroll down and select Add CSS 

Now you can add the following text to the box labeled "Add custom CSS":

.post-body {
text-align:justify;
}

Select "APPLY TO BLOG" and you should be done.

You can always overwrite the default behavior. If you want a paragraph with a ragged edge (or centered), just select the paragraph in the posting editor and select the appropriate text alignment icon from the toolbar.

Similarly, if you are crazy (and who am I to judge?) and want other default behavior, instead of text-align:justify; you could use text-align:center; or text-align:right; (or the default or text-align:left;) in your added CSS.

Phil Jones and "Basic Physics"

Craig Loehle:
The comment of Jones about basic physics betrays a world view, that the belief structure of the modelers is “basic physics” (and you will hear this from advocates on the blogs), which is a deductive science and firmly established and does not allow for doubt. The fact that the physics they know requires tricky boundary conditions, parameterizations for subgrip processes, unknown forcing histories which must be guessed at (e.g., aerosols), and numerical kludges is pretended away.

"How To Cheat, Or Fool Yourself, With Time Series: Climate Example"

It’s your confidence intervals which are the real convincers in the trick. Did you notice that both confidence intervals (for the first two figures) confirm the hypothesis that things are getting better and things are getting worse? Isn’t that great!

You fail logic forever

there is no way Singer can say the proxy data doesn't record the last 20 years of warming, as we don't have enough of the proxy series after about 1980.

But that means that you can not show that the proxy data actually does record the warming of the last 20 years.

Flatline Warming Trend

Climate experts know that the long-term warming trend has not abated in the past decade. In fact, it was the warmest decade on record.

I do wish people would make it clear where the differences lie. Otherwise we will get nowhere. Sceptics note that the temperature has flatlined since the turn of the millennium. Upholders say this means nothing, it's just a pause, and the long-term trend remains upward. Fine. Maybe we should talk about model falsification or something.

But take a look at that sentence again. I don't see how the long-term trend (normally assessed over 30 years) can not have been abated to some extent by a 10-year flatlining. Is the maths they use in climatology a bit different?